• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Continuation: Discussion of the George Zimmerman case

Status
Not open for further replies.
Can someone clear something up for me? I was under the impression (possibly mistaken) that the witness who called in and said Zimmerman was a racist was his ex-wife/girlfriend. I didn’t pay much attention because I thought this was the same person who filed the PFA against him and he did the same for her. I thought it may be a grudge thing. Now if this Witness 9 is a different woman, we have a second woman saying pretty much the same thing, and she may also have a grudge, but it may be legitimate if he did do things to her that she wasn’t complicit in.
 
bookworm said:
Can someone clear something up for me? I was under the impression (possibly mistaken) that the witness who called in and said Zimmerman was a racist was his ex-wife/girlfriend. I didn’t pay much attention because I thought this was the same person who filed the PFA against him and he did the same for her. I thought it may be a grudge thing. Now if this Witness 9 is a different woman, we have a second woman saying pretty much the same thing, and she may also have a grudge, but it may be legitimate if he did do things to her that she wasn’t complicit in.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty much waiting to attach actual under oath statements and cross examinations to names at trial.

IIRC, wasn't it said that when they interviewed the sexual battery victim, she said he wasn't racist?
 
bookworm said:
Can someone clear something up for me? I was under the impression (possibly mistaken) that the witness who called in and said Zimmerman was a racist was his ex-wife/girlfriend. I didn’t pay much attention because I thought this was the same person who filed the PFA against him and he did the same for her. I thought it may be a grudge thing. Now if this Witness 9 is a different woman, we have a second woman saying pretty much the same thing, and she may also have a grudge, but it may be legitimate if he did do things to her that she wasn’t complicit in.
Click to expand...
Different person.

Ex-fiance didn't gripe about race regarding Z.

He was a pretty crappy boyfriend though...
 
crimresearch said:
IIRC, wasn't it said that when they interviewed the sexual battery victim, she said he wasn't racist?
Click to expand...

Nope - that just an artifact from the original narrative. The media jumped on the idea that W9 sounded like the same person as the order of protection. Zimmerman's ex said that he was no racist. W9 called SPD first anonomously and told them to check Zimmerman's background, that he was confrontational and had racial animus. Later in the investigation, they somehow reconnected (W9 and FDLE) and she said Zimmerman's whole family was racist but couldn't provide any examples of words or actions other than Zimmerman's mom didn't like Obama. After that, she re-interviewed and did the sexual allegations.
 
Cylinder said:
...After that, she re-interviewed and did the sexual allegations.
Click to expand...
She brought up the sexual allegations 'things he did to her' in that first anonymous call to Sanford Police. <the details redacted> Of course the details were much, much more in the follow up interview.

Trekelle Perkins was the officer who took the call.



It was released in the first discovery dump.
 
Last edited:
Cylinder said:
Nope - that just an artifact from the original narrative. The media jumped on the idea that W9 sounded like the same person as the order of protection. Zimmerman's ex said that he was no racist. W9 called SPD first anonomously and told them to check Zimmerman's background, that he was confrontational and had racial animus. Later in the investigation, they somehow reconnected (W9 and FDLE) and she said Zimmerman's whole family was racist but couldn't provide any examples of words or actions other than Zimmerman's mom didn't like Obama. After that, she re-interviewed and did the sexual allegations.
Click to expand...
Thanks, that's how I find the whole W9, W22 thing a mess.
 
sgtbaker said:
I have not once suggested that an 8 year old cannot sexually assault though. I do not think that is true. I think state of mind is clearly different between an 8 year old and an adult, they probably don't know the severity of forcing a sexual act on someone else but that makes it no less sexual assault.

Don't deny that children are sexual beings. They are and they learn, early on, about gratification. That is all very normal. What is not so normal is an 8 year old not understanding your private parts and mine. That is not normal and that kind of hypersexuality is indicative of a disorder or experiencing some kind of sexual misconduct.
Click to expand...

I think we are in agreement.
 
TheL8Elvis said:
I don't want to be accused of being a hypocrite, as I have discussed issues that are more peripheral than central to the case....

But perhaps the general topic of molestation and at what ages children have sexual urges, etc. would be better served to be in its own thread ?

Just a thought.
Click to expand...

Oh come now, after all the other irrelevant derails?

:D
 
triforcharity said:
He's still out on bond, right? Ok, just wanted to clarify, make sure we're still on the same page.
Click to expand...

Is it your contention that being out on bail proves that Judge Lester gave GZ every benefit of the doubt ?

I thought he was out out bail because the state failed to prove that the GZ could be held without bond.
 
triforcharity said:
Yepo, that's the one.

Did you read the entire chapter crimesearch?


Here's another one.

Florida SS 794.011 (3) and (4)

Your turn...
Click to expand...

base on all the stuff below, I don't see a description of the assault that meets the criteria below for not having a time limitation.

Instead of just throwing out numbers, I would like to know the act the victim describes (since that is relevant to what constitutes sexual battery) and which specif section you think exempts the act.


http://www.lawserver.com/law/state/florida/statutes/florida_statutes_775-15

I see a bunch of time limits, with exceptions for 794.0111, of which you call out 3 and 4:

(3) A person who commits sexual battery upon a person 12 years of age or older, without that person’s consent, and in the process thereof uses or threatens to use a deadly weapon or uses actual physical force likely to cause serious personal injury commits a life felony, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, s. 775.084, or s. 794.0115.

(4) A person who commits sexual battery upon a person 12 years of age or older without that person’s consent, under any of the following circumstances, commits a felony of the first degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, s. 775.084, or s. 794.0115:

(h) "Sexual battery" means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another or the anal or vaginal penetration of another by any other object; however, sexual battery does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.
 
TheL8Elvis said:
Is it your contention that being out on bail proves that Judge Lester gave GZ every benefit of the doubt ?
Click to expand...

Actually, yes. He could have chosen a much higher amount which would have prevented him from achieving bail, or prevented it completely by stating that GZ was absolutely a flight risk, and even a GPS monitor wouldn't satisfy the judge's reasonable conclusion.

They could have appealed, but it would have taken even more time and blah blah blah....

TheL8Elvis said:
I thought he was out out bail because the state failed to prove that the GZ could be held without bond.
Click to expand...

That's your thought, which would be an opinion, which is subjective.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom